BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[Alba]

Scottish Lib Dem MP

Received letter today from my local MP as follows:

"Thank you for your email of 27 March regarding Section S58(4) of the Finance Act 2008.

I am currently in conversation with colleagues about potential steps we can take to persuade the Treasury to reverse the retrospective element of Section 58.

When I have more information I shall be back in touch."

[Alba]

Lib Dem

Received letter today from my local MP as follows:

"Thank you for your email of 27 March regarding Section S58(4) of the Finance Act 2008.

I am currently in conversation with colleagues about potential steps we can take to persuade the Treasury to reverse the retrospective element of Section 58.

When I have more information I shall be back in touch."

BTW it wasn't the "ginger rodent"

[TalkingCheese]

Sounds positive !

"...I am currently in conversation with colleagues about potential steps we can take to persuade the Treasury to reverse the retrospective element of Section 58..."

Good job. I really believe that they just need to understand what has happened and how we are where we are, to see the injustice. Short, sharp and to the point. I sent too much stuff to my MP initially and I reckon he only took notice when I took a one pager to the meeting as he didn't look at the rest.

There are some basic questions which are just not being answered:
- why did it take HMRC so long ?
- why were Rees rules or their own protocols not followed ?

As systems and protocols have now changed in a way which would not have let the indefinite retro element of S 58 come about (involving JCHR, pre-warning of a change in the law before making it retro to the warning etc etc), why is it not being amended ?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Received letter today from my local MP as follows:

"Thank you for your email of 27 March regarding Section S58(4) of the Finance Act 2008.

I am currently in conversation with colleagues about potential steps we can take to persuade the Treasury to reverse the retrospective element of Section 58.

When I have more information I shall be back in touch."

[Fireship]

Received letter today from my local MP as follows:

"Thank you for your email of 27 March regarding Section S58(4) of the Finance Act 2008.

I am currently in conversation with colleagues about potential steps we can take to persuade the Treasury to reverse the retrospective element of Section 58.

When I have more information I shall be back in touch."

That gives me a good feeling with which to start the weekend

[ALMAC]

Any chance of letting us know who the MP is.

I am in Scotland too and have been looking for a sympathetic MP.

[Ganimos]

That gives me a good feeling with which to start the weekend

Trying to get a round of applause going

[Dieselpower]

That gives me a good feeling with which to start the weekend

Trying to get a round of applause going

I have added another two applauses - but the major applauses, or standing ovations are yet to come. Theres going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces very soon. We just need to be a bit patient - a few weeks perhaps.

[Ganimos]

I have added another two applauses - but the major applauses, or standing ovations are yet to come. Theres going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces very soon. We just need to be a bit patient - a few weeks perhaps.

Maybe not a few weeks........but its coming.


It’s the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic in 16 days time.
It was sunk by an Iceberg. The tip of the iceberg.

The group of people in this forum are like the iceberg
Titanic was the flag ship of the White Star Line.

BN66 was the flagship of a frustrated Revenue Department, aimed at perfectly legal taxpayers
who they knew were perfectly legal, for many many years. So they sought not only compliance but revenge.(Retrospection)

The Titanic was sunk by an iceberg.
The group of people in this forum are like the iceberg.

Their power is still all beneath the surface.


There are 650 M Ps around the country. I guess maybe 30 or so have been contacted to date.
Most MPs don’t even know of BN66 retrospection.

Get writing now !

[BolshieBastard]

India retrospective tax change!

Ahem!

Now I wonder who they got this idea from!!

India could face constitutional crisis over tax proposals - Telegraph

The Indian tax office appealed the case, but the Supreme Court ruled in Vodafone’s favour again earlier this month.

When Mr Mukherjee outlined the proposal on March 16, it was expected to leave the Supreme Court judgment intact, as the government argued that it was simply clarifying the law to match the original intention of legislation drafted in 1962.

However, it has since emerged that it could be backdated, making the telecoms group once again vulnerable to the $2.2bn charge, and haking corporate confidence in investing in the fast-growing country.

"People are only just starting to get to grips with full implications of what is happening," said a source with knowledge of the situation.